Matthew Wilcox wrote: >> What we would rather do in KVM, is have the VFs appear in the host as >> standard network devices. We would then like to back our existing PV >> driver to this VF directly bypassing the host networking stack. A key >> feature here is being able to fill the VF's receive queue with guest >> memory instead of host kernel memory so that you can get zero-copy >> receive traffic. This will perform just as well as doing passthrough >> (at least) and avoid all that ugliness of dealing with SR-IOV in the guest. >> > > This argues for ignoring the SR-IOV mess completely. It does, but VF-in-host is not the only model that we want to support. It's just the most appealing. There will definitely be people who want to run VF-in-guest. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
